SHRI OM PARKASH BAJAJ,FEROZEPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1), FEROZEPUR
Facts
The assessee deposited cash in his bank account, and no return was filed. Reassessment proceedings were initiated, and assessment was completed ex parte. The first appellate authority dismissed the appeal due to a significant delay.
Held
The Tribunal held that the first appellate authority did not provide the assessee an adequate opportunity to explain the delay. Therefore, the matter was remanded back.
Key Issues
Whether the first appellate authority erred in dismissing the appeal without providing the assessee sufficient opportunity to explain the delay in filing the appeal.
Sections Cited
250, 144, 147, 148, 156, 249(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR
Before: SH. MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL & SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA
Per Udayan Dasgupta, J.M.:
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT (A) NFAC, Delhi dated 29.02.2024 passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (henceforth the Act) which has emanated from the order of the ITO, Ward 3(2), Ferozepur dated
25.12.2019 passed u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2 I.T.A. No. 216/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 2. Condonation of delay: This appeal is belated by four days, and considering the
explanation of the assessee the same is condoned and the appeal is admitted for hearing
on merits.
There is no appearance by the assessee or his counsel on repeated calls either
physically or virtually. An adjournment application is filed praying time for filing of
paper book.
Considering the grounds of appeal and the materials on record we proceed to
dispose off this appeal after hearing the Ld. DR.
Brief facts emerging from records are that the assessee has deposited cash
amounting to Rs. 12.85 lakhs in his bank account with J & K Bank, during the FY
2011-12, and in absence of any return being filed, proceedings were initiated u/s 148
(after necessary approval from higher authorities) and in absence of any compliance
or representation on the part of the assessee to various notices issued, assessment has
been completed exparte on a total income of Rs. 12.85 lakhs.
The matter carried in appeal has been dismissed in limine by the Ld. first
appellate authority refusing to admit the appeal for adjudication on merits on account
of inordinate delay in filing the same by 740 days ( seven hundred forty days ) , which
according to the assessee has arisen due to non-communication of the assessment order
3 I.T.A. No. 216/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 in the proper address of the assessee as recorded in bank statement on the basis of
which the reassessment has been commenced.
The assessee has filed a short paper book consisting of some of notices being
issued at the old address of the assessee at “Makhu Gate House”, Ferozpur City, along
with evidence of copy of sale deed , to explain that the said residential house has been
sold off in the year 2000, along copy of notice u/s 156 dated 25/12/2019 , directed at
the same address to explain that the assessee has already left the said house and notices
were never actually served, along with an affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay.
The Ld. DR, submitted that there is some degree of inconsistency in between
the submissions of the assessee, where the sale deed of old house is in the year 2000,
but notice u/s 148 followed by all other statutory notices has been issued in the year
2019 and the final demand notice u/s 156 is also in the year 2019 as such the dates are
all prior to the sale date , and further relied on the observation of the Ld first appellate
authority ( para 5.5 ) to argue that apart from postal service , notices and orders are
also served in email id as per portal in terms of rule 127(2)(b) and that leaves no doubt
about its actual service, and it is also not pointed out to which address the penalty
notice has been received.
We have heard the Ld. DR and considered the materials on record. We are of
the opinion that before rejection of the appeal under section 249(3) of the Act, the Ld.
4 I.T.A. No. 216/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 first appellate authority has not allowed any opportunity to the assessee to explain the
reasons for the delay with documents on record and the two-line condonation filed with
form 35 does not bring out the factual aspect of the matter to establish “sufficient
cause” for the delay.
As such in the interest of justice we remand the matter back to the Ld. first
appellate authority to allow the assessee an opportunity to explain the long delay of
740 days , with all documentary evidences , to the full satisfaction of the appellate
authority, and only after the same being satisfactorily explained, the appeal will be
admitted to be heard and decided on merits on the grounds contained in the appeal
memorandum.
We have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in accordance with Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate
Tribunal) Rules, 1963 as on 12.03.2026
Sd/- Sd/- (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Udayan Dasgupta) Accountant Member Judicial Member *GP/Sr.PS* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1) The Appellant: (2) The Respondent:
5 I.T.A. No. 216/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2012-13 (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T True Copy By Order
